Runner's World 10K at TCRHere's how RW members rated this race in the past (41 votes). | 1 to 10 of 41 ratings | Page: 1 2 3 4 5 |
| The big picture (41 votes) | | Overall score | | 36% | | How many would do it again? | | 26% | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 57% | | PB potential | | 48% | | Atmosphere | | 39% | | Organisation | | 26% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 52% |
|
|
2005 race reviewed by: Nik Wright
 | | Overall score | | 20% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 20% | | Atmosphere | | 20% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: What a bunch of muppetts - how can they get the last KM so wrong and delay the start by 45 mins when 700+ runers are lined up on "ready..set...oooops, delayed"... rubbish rubbish rubbish!
In full: Rubbish...
But, if you're looking for a challenging, windy, undulating, 3 lap course in Esher, which is 11KM long and is organised by a bunch of muppetts, then do it!
Thank god for the Triathlon exhibition...
Date of review: April 13, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Michael Frean
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Not Good enough
In full: Everyone who ran this race should be given the option of having the fee returned or free entry to another "Runners World" race - was very very disappointing for RW
Date of review: February 17, 2005
|
2004 race reviewed by: Chris Bale 2
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: |
In short: Not good enough
In full: Sorry, Race Organiser, but that explanation really isn't enough. The heavy rain fell early in the morning, and protection of the track should have been in place in plenty of time for a 10.00 start. Protection was in place last year too, but the event still started on time. And why was there no explanation on Sunday morning? And why was the final 1km wrongly measured?
Date of review: February 16, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Dawn Hunter
| | Overall score | | 60% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: |
In short: From the Race Organiser
In full: My apologies for the late start of the Runners World 10k. The Clark of the Course at Sandown did a late inspection and requested we put more covering down on sections of the course. This was both for the safety of runners following the mornings heavy rain, and for the added protection of the racecourse itself due to horse-racing this Thursday (17th).
Date of review: February 16, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: A.J Cotter
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 40% | | PB potential | | 20% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Late, long and disorganised.
In full: I'm a raw amateur at this running game but even with my limited experience this event was the lowpoint of my athletics career. Was this organised by a tardy carpet fitter with no head for figures?
Date of review: February 16, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Susanne Groener
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 20% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 60% |
In short: unacceptable start delay - ended up cold and fed up
Date of review: February 16, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Les Collett
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | Maybe | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 60% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 40% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 40% |
In short: Organisational disaster
In full: The main stand at Sandown Park has a very effective tannoy sytem. Shame it wasn't used to good effect! Also, who measured the course?? How I can run 9 single Km splits with a 10 second spread but take a full 2 minutes more for the last 1k is beyond me. I know it was windy but not THAT windy!
Date of review: February 15, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: The_Dodger
| | Overall score | | 20% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 20% |
In short: Too Cold, too long, too......bad I wasted 12 quid and a day!
In full: The delay was diabolical...no excusefor delaying 2 minutes from the start! The race was over 10K...I sped up on the last kilometer and it was still 2minutes slower than my average K pace! There I was feeling sorry for myself for running so slowly, blaming the cold that i was still suffering from and doubting myself...good to know that it wasn't just me (I swear I didn't walk the last one K).
Date of review: February 15, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: redrum
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 20% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 60% |
In short: How long??
In full: Glad i checked on here as i thought it was me just slowing on the last k. A bad start, a delay for no reason, an overlong course and a naff goody bag (where's the medal or t-shirt?). For something with the runners world name it was a big let down, the only way i'll go round there again is if im on horse back!!
Date of review: February 15, 2005
|
2005 race reviewed by: Naomi Anderson
| | Overall score | | 40% | | Would you do it again? | | No | | | | Details: | | Scenery | | 60% | | PB potential | | 20% | | Atmosphere | | 40% | | Organisation | | 20% | | Value | | 40% | | Beginner-friendliness | | 20% |
In short: A big disappointment
In full: The 45 minute delay was frustrating, the course was variable (I didn't like the carpet bits at all) and the freezing wind didn't help. The last kilometre (if that's what it really measured) was a killer. Not one I'd do again in a hurry.
Date of review: February 15, 2005
|
| |
denotes Subscriber-only content | 
